Oly 14-42 EZ – Reality Check

I've had the 14-42 EZ for about a year, and received a new/refurbished one when my original malfunctioned last summer. I don't use the lens much, and when I do it's generally at 14mm. But I had it out last week, zoomed to 42mm quite a bit, and noticed that the images appeared softer than I expected when I returned home. Most of those were shot at f5.6 or f8.

Did some very cursory comparisons this afternoon, and just wanted to see if this is about what others are seeing with this lens. With my copy, images at 42mm are soft at f5.6, acceptable at f8, but sharpen up nicely by f11. Images at 14mm are sharper across the board. Images below are 100% crops, at f5.6, f8 and f11 (starting from the right). Thanks.

Thanks. Just wasn't sure if the replacement was a dud, or if it was in the typical range of sharpness for this lens. I primarily use the 12-40/2.8 when using a zoom in this range, so the softness of the photos at 42mm caught me a bit off guard.

Interesting. Took mine with me to Europe this summer. Used it extensively outdoors and had great success. Here is the link to one of the pics posted earlier today. Looks sharp even zoomed. Perhaps I got lucky with my copy......common with inexpensive lenses.

Interesting. Took mine with me to Europe this summer. Used it extensively outdoors and had great success. Here is the link to one of the pics posted earlier today. Looks sharp even zoomed. Perhaps I got lucky with my copy......common with inexpensive lenses.

Thanks. Just wasn't sure if the replacement was a dud, or if it was in the typical range of sharpness for this lens. I primarily use the 12-40/2.8 when using a zoom in this range, so the softness of the photos at 42mm caught me a bit off guard.

Click to expand...

Same for me.

The 12-40 sets an impossibly high standard for any kit lens to reach. As you have already stated, so long as you have plenty light available and stop down to f8+ then sharpness improves considerably.

I did some comparison tests of the 14-42 against the Panasonic 12-32. TBH, I didn't see a huge difference, but the Panasonic lens was definitely sharper, esp at 14mm. At 32mm there wasn't a lot to choose. I couldn't compare at 42mm obviously, but I did notice that the 14-42 was less sharp at 42 than 32.

Mine is kinda soft to, but i wouldnt call it unsharp. The lens just lacks the "bite", i think they call it microcontrast or something that we se as the "pop" or 3d effect in other lenses. The 40-150 f/4-5.6 is such a lens imho that has great microcontrast but isnt sharp like a prime.

Personaly i've always find it hard keeping kit lenses, but the 14-42ez is a keeper because of its size and weight. Its just a marvel of design there!

PDK did those tests with a lens which I owned previously : I was happy with the sharpness and very impressed with the smoothness and useability.
I think we're spoiled (from day one!) with sharpness across the whole m4/3rds system : G1 + 14-45mm was no slouch and the E-M5's Sony 16mpx sensor is very sharp indeed, then there's the 20mm, 75mm, Pro zooms etc.
I believe the 14-42EZ is a sharp lens (example variation aside) but we cannot expect the earth if it folds flat too ...

I still remember how shocked I was with DSLR kit zooms from Sony and Canon giving me the impression of coke bottle bottoms compared to the Olympus ones.

So out of curiosity I decided to do a non scientific test of the 14-42 ez I got recently. This was at 42mm f5.6,f8, and f11 from a tripod with my E-P5 using Raw and no editing or sharpening applied. The results were surprisingly good to my eyes, it's slightly fuzzy wide open and at f11. However you wouldn't know that if you weren't looking at it 100%. To me f8 seems to be the sweet spot for that focal length. Perhaps I got a good one? Even if it was softer I don't think I'd mind because it fits in a small pocket. Great combo with my pen and 40-150mm r lens. Full image and 100% crops below.